Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Nelly's recollections are fascinating. However, in at least one area they are rather dramatically contradicted by Washington's own records.
Nelly writes that:
Quote:
He attended the church at Alexandria when the weather and roads permitted a ride of ten miles [a one-way journey of 2-3 hours by horse or carriage]. In New York and Philadelphia he never omitted attendance at church in the morning, unless detained by indisposition [sickness].
His own diaries show instead that he attended church, on average, only about twelve times a year.The Diaries of George Washington
yes i am. he was right and so were the other founding fathers.
as to the the civil war. we can both be right and both be wrong at the same time.
we reflect god imperfectly. that is why war should have careful consideration lest we fail.
Outstanding post that deserved the rep it got from me.
I did notice the dates, and I think the letter is a perfect contemporaneous example of how the assumptions of the day can become part of the historical record without any independent validation. I respect the strength of your convictions with regards to your religious beliefs, but because Washington studiously avoided making his convictions public, I don't think we can positively assert that Washington was a Christian. Just because Nelly is a historical figure doesn't mean that she wasn't biased. Her Christian values infused the way she lived her life. It's only natural that she would project her own Christian beliefs on to a man she loved, admired, and deeply respected. But Washington didn't assert that he was a Christian, and when asked directly, he avoided the question. That's part of the history, too.
I have to continue to say that you are talking progressive beliefs that many have come to accept since it was what they were taught in school. I am too old to have had that crap hoisted in front of me. In fact, the date of the only writing in that bunch was the year of my birth. Progressives just hadn't taken over education yet then so I missed so much of what they taught in school but they are doing it very well today.
I agree with Beck that although progressives are running the Democrat party right now most Dems just aren't progressives. In other words, we believe that progressives want communism or fascism to control this nation. I don't think that most Dems really want that. Take the way Nasty Nancy was treated by those Code Pink progressives on the floor of the House the other day. She has been taken in by them but isn't really one of them. Take the way that Joe Biden wants Dems to control but can't handle much of progressive crap. Lets hide and watch to see what happens with the Dem party in the next few months leading up to the election just to see what happens.
Deists believe in a Supreme Being. Most don't believe in Divine Intervention, but that doesn't mean that someone who doesn't believe in the divinity of Christ cannot believe in divine intervention.
Washington spoke of that very Divine Intervention you talk about more than once in letters to his contemporaries. I have just posted the letter to his wife that he wrote in so doing. Yes he believed in the Supreme Being and he did say that that Being had intervened in keeping him alive that day. I guess you can't see that but maybe you don't want to see it.
I would like to call your attention to the letter I posted some time ago to his wife after the battle in which Braddock was killed and Washington took at least three bullets in his tricorn and two in his coat and had two horses shot out from under him.
Actually... the letter was to his brother, not his wife. And in the letter, he never mentions a belief in Christ. As a matter of fact, any reference to Christ at all, or even a mention of the name of Jesus cannot be found once in any of voluminous writings.
Quote:
Originally Posted by roysoldboy
I could even mention that the Indian chief who controlled the Indians in that slaughter of Braddock's men said he told his best shooters to kill Washington but they said they couldn't hit him. Washington mentioned in his letter that it must have been that Supreme Being he always talked about that saved him. Later, after the Revolution, that Indian told Washington that he had the Great Spirit with him.
You could, but we know for a fact that the story as told never happened. So you would be mentioning a fiction, not history. There is no account of any such Indian chief making any such statement in any historical record (certainly not in Washington's diaries), and during the age of muskets it is silly to imagine an Indian chief even having "best shooters."
Further, the story (as it comes down to us) claims Washington was the only officer to escape unscathed from that battle. For example, your heavily fictionalized account reads, "One by one, the chief’s marksmen shot the mounted British officers until only one remained." In fact, out of 86 British Officers in that battle, 26 were killed and 37 wounded. That means that 23 officers (including Washington) "remained" untouched by French or Indian lead. So much for the efforts of those "best shooters."
Again... he did not say anything about a "Supreme Being." He said "Providence."
So... you could mention all sorts of stuff. The problem is that most of what you'd be mentioning is bullsh*t.
Nelly's recollections are fascinating. However, in at least one area they are rather dramatically contradicted by Washington's own records.
Nelly writes that:
His own diaries show instead that he attended church, on average, only about twelve times a year.The Diaries of George Washington
Point me to that part that you quoted so I won't have to read the whole thing. I am pretty busy trying to discredit progressives the way they are after my heroes who want the done away with. Maybe that says that I want to do away with Media Matters and others like them that were created for only one thing and we all know what that is.
Let me suggest to you that the government the founders was established because they just didn't want an anarchy but wanted to be as close to that as possible.
Actually, that's certain nonsense. The reason we have a Representative Republic instead of a Direct Democracy was because they wanted an order too rigid to easily change based on popular whim or mob emotion.
Washington spoke of that very Divine Intervention you talk about more than once in letters to his contemporaries. I have just posted the letter to his wife that he wrote in so doing. Yes he believed in the Supreme Being and he did say that that Being had intervened in keeping him alive that day. I guess you can't see that but maybe you don't want to see it.
Washington's mentioning of "Providence" is indistinguishable from the pagan conception of "Fate."
Actually... the letter was to his brother, not his wife. And in the letter, he never mentions a belief in Christ. As a matter of fact, any reference to Christ at all, or even a mention of the name of Jesus cannot be found once in any of voluminous writings.
You could, but we know for a fact that the story as told never happened. So you would be mentioning a fiction, not history. There is no account of any such Indian chief making any such statement in any historical record (certainly not in Washington's diaries), and during the age of muskets it is silly to imagine an Indian chief even having "best shooters."
Further, the story (as it comes down to us) claims Washington was the only officer to escape unscathed from that battle. For example, your heavily fictionalized account reads, "One by one, the chief’s marksmen shot the mounted British officers until only one remained." In fact, out of 86 British Officers in that battle, 26 were killed and 37 wounded. That means that 23 officers (including Washington) "remained" untouched by French or Indian lead. So much for the efforts of those "best shooters."
Again... he did not say anything about a "Supreme Being." He said "Providence."
So... you could mention all sorts of stuff. The problem is that most of what you'd be mentioning is bullsh*t.
You are sounding more and more like what I heard today that Cass Sustein said about 3 years ago. You aren't taking crap from the man who is the head man of propaganda from the White House are you?
Surely supreme being and providence couldn't possibly the same thing in the mind of any progressive or other anti-Christian, could they? To me they are the same thing.
These arguments about Washington never admitting to being a Christian just sound like progressive Pelosi trying to convince people that he was not a Christian. BTW, did I say somewhere that he mentioned Jesus anywhere?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
